This video was posted on one of the Facebook groups I am a member of. I hope that the video is still available to new readers as this is an excellent example of why we have Rules of the Road.
What I find interesting with posted videos on social media is the wealth of interesting (and quite frankly) entertaining comments to the posted video. Comments from readers were all over the place. Most of the conclusions were emotionally charge without any factual information; in fact, I don't believe there was a single correct comment out of the hundreds of responses. Therefore, I wanted to take this opportunity to educate my readers.
Before you continue on, I encourage the reader to watch the video a couple of times; then, think about who is a fault here.
Now; let’s see if you’re right?
First, we need to make some assumptions as no other information (other than whats on the video) was provided.
From the camera’s perspective we do not see any land; so we will assume we are in international waters.
Based on the speed and steady course heading of the passenger ship, we will assume that the vessel is under control.
Looking at all the camera angles we do not see any beacons or markers; so we will assume that the larger ship is not contained by draft (CBD).
The passenger ship is not navigating in a narrow channel or fairway.
Since no other vessels are seen in direction of the passenger ship, we assume that the passenger ship is not using or apart of a Traffic Separation Scheme.
The sailboat is not using any motorized propulsion.
It is assumed that both vessels are aware of each other long before the two vessels are in close proximity
We assume the passenger ship has a posted lookout
We assume the sailboat is well aware of the passenger ship’s position due to his unobstructed view behind the helm.
The collision takes place in American waters.
This is a classic crossing situation; therefore Rule 15 is in play here.
RULE 15
Crossing Situation
When two power-driven vessels are crossing so as to involve risk of collision, the vessel which has the other on her own starboard side shall keep out of the way and shall, if the circumstances of the case admit, avoid crossing ahead of the other vessel.
If we ignored all other rules, the above explanation would be pretty self-explanatory; meaning, the sailboat is the stand-on vessel and the passenger ship is the give-way vessel.
However, RULE 15 states 2 power-driven vessels; and since we assume the sailboat is not under any type of motorized propulsion, RULE 15 doesn’t apply.
BUT; is that enough to determine fault? Nope, we must look at RULES 16 and 17 as well.
RULE 16
Action by Give-way Vessel
Every vessel which is directed to keep out of the way of another vessel shall, so far as possible, take early and substantial action to keep well clear.
Since we haven't determined who is the give-way vessel; the only thing we can say for sure is that if either vessel was the give-way vessel, they would be in violation of RULE 16.
RULE 17
Action by Stand-on Vessel
(a)
(i) Where one of two vessels is to keep out of the way the other shall keep her course and speed.
(ii) The latter vessel may however take action to avoid collision by her maneuver alone, as soon as it becomes apparent to her that the vessel required to keep out of the way is not taking appropriate action in compliance with these Rules.
(b) When, from any cause, the vessel required to keep her course and speed finds herself so close that collision cannot be avoided by the action of the give-way vessel alone, she shall take such action as will best aid to avoid collision.
(c) A power-driven vessel which takes action in a crossing situation in accordance with subparagraph (a)(ii) of this Rule to avoid collision with another power-driven vessel shall, if the circumstances of the case admit, not alter course to port for a vessel on her own port side.
(d) This Rule does not relieve the give-way vessel of her obligation to keep out of the way.
Since we haven't really determined which vessel is the stand-on vessel, we don't know which vessel to apply this rule. However, if either vessel was the stand-on vessel, each vessel would be in violation of RULE 17 (b)
We need to determine which vessel is the stand-on vessel and which vessel is the give-way vessel.
At this point in our analysis, we are going to assume that the sailboat is the stand-on vessel. However, the sailboat as the stand-on vessel has an obligation. At the moment when the sailboat determined that the passenger ship's course and speed did not change, the sailboat under RULE 17 (b) was required to take necessary action to avoid collision. As we see in the video, the sailboat made a course correction that would have avoided the passenger ship; the problem was that the sailboat made it to late. Perhaps poor judgement, or defiance; regardless of reason, the sailboat is in violation of RULE 17.
Let's review RULE 18; because we are still assuming that the sailboat is the stand on vessel.
RULE 18
Responsibilities Between Vessels
Except where Rules 9, 10 and 13 otherwise require:
(a) A power-driven vessel underway shall keep out of the way of:
(i) a vessel not under command;
(ii) a vessel restricted in her ability to maneuver; (iii) a vessel engaged in fishing;
(iv) a sailing vessel.
(b) A sailing vessel underway shall keep out of the way of: (i) a vessel not under command;
(ii) a vessel restricted in her ability to maneuver;
(iii) a vessel engaged in fishing.
Based on our assumption, the passenger ship is a power driven vessel and the sailboat is not under power. We must also look at RULES 9, 10 and 13.
RULE 9
Narrow Channels
(a)
(i) A vessel proceeding along the course of a narrow channel or fairway shall keep as near to the outer limit of the channel or fairway which lies on her starboard side as is safe and practicable.
(ii) Notwithstanding paragraph (a)(i) and Rule 14(a), a power-driven vessel operating in narrow channels or fairways on the Great Lakes, Western Rivers, or waters specified by the Secretary, and proceeding downbound with a following current shall have the right-of-way over an upbound vessel, shall propose the manner and place of passage, and shall initiate the maneuvering signals prescribed by Rule 34(a)(i), as appropriate. The vessel proceeding upbound against the current shall hold as necessary to permit safe passing.
Based on our assumptions the passenger ship is not operating in a narrow channel.
RULE 10
Traffic Separation Schemes
(a) This Rule applies to traffic separation schemes adopted by the Organization and does not relieve any vessel of her obligation under any other rule.
(b) A vessel using a traffic separation scheme shall:
(i) proceed in the appropriate traffic lane in the general direction of traffic flow for that lane;
(ii) so far as practicable keep clear of a traffic separation line or separation zone;
(iii) normally join or leave a traffic lane at the termination of the lane, but when joining or leaving from either side shall do so at as small an angle to the general direction of traffic flow as practicable.
(c) A vessel shall, so far as practicable, avoid crossing traffic lanes but if obliged to do so shall cross on a heading as nearly as practicable at right angles to the general direction of traffic flow.
Based on our assumption, the passenger ship is not operating in a Traffic Separation Scheme.
RULE 13
Overtaking
(a) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Rules of Part B, Sections I and II, any vessel overtaking any other shall keep out of the way of the vessel being overtaken.
(b) A vessel shall be deemed to be overtaking when coming up with another vessel from a direction more than 22.5 degrees abaft her beam, that is, in such a position with reference to the vessel she is overtaking, that at night she would be able to see only the sternlight of that vessel but neither of her sidelights.
(c) When a vessel is in any doubt as to whether she if overtaking another, she shall assume that this is the case and act accordingly. (d) Any subsequent alteration of the bearing between the two vessels shall not make the overtaking vessel a crossing vessel within the meaning of these Rules or relieve her of the duty of keeping clear of the overtaken vessel until she is finally past and clear.
RULE 13 does not apply as the angle of the crossing is no where near the passenger ship’s abaft her beam angle. This is a true crossing situation.
After reviewing RULES 9,10 and 13 and based on our assumptions, we need to review RULE 18 a little closer since RULES 9, 10 and 13 do not apply.
After a review of RULE 18, the passenger ship is not granted any exception to RULE 18 and therefore is considered the give-way vessel since the passenger ship is approaching on the sailboat’s port side and power vessels shall give way to vessels under sail.
So based on what we have reviewed thus far, the passenger ship appears to be at fault of RULE 18 and 16. Do you agree thus far?
However, with every collision event, we now have to consider RULE 7
RULE 7 Risk of Collision
(a) Every vessel shall use all available means appropriate to the prevailing circumstances and conditions to determine if risk of collision exists. If there is any doubt such risk shall be deemed to exist.
(b) Proper use shall be made of radar equipment if fitted and operational, including long-range scanning to obtain early warning of risk of collision and radar plotting or equivalent systematic observation of detected objects.
(c) Assumptions shall not be made on the basis of scanty information, especially scanty radar information.
(d) In determining if risk of collision exists the following considerations shall be among those taken into account:
(i) such risk shall be deemed to exist if the compass bearing of an approaching vessel does not appreciably change;
(ii) such risk may sometimes exist even when an appreciable bearing change is evident, particularly when approaching a very large vessel or a tow or when approaching a vessel at close range
When you apply RULE 7, responsibility is expanded; specifically when you we look at section (i) and section (ii).
When we apply RULE 7... The sailor‘s location behind the helm provides an unobstructed view of the large passenger vessel and had a responsibility to avoid the passenger ship long before the two vessels came into close proximity of one another. Additionally, the sailor failed to provide the doubt signal of five short blasts of the horn. Therefore, the sailboat (as well as the passenger ship) is in violation of RULE 7.
And often, when RULE 7 is applied, we must consider RULE 8. RULE 8 defines the action(s) to avoid a collision.
RULE 8
(a) Any action shall [be taken in accordance with the Rules of this Part and], if the circumstances of the case admit, be positive, made in ample time and with due regard to the observance of good seamanship.
(b) Any alteration of course and/or speed to avoid collision shall, if the circumstances of the case admit, be large enough to be readily apparent to another vessel observing visually or by radar; a succession of small alterations of course and/or speed should be avoided.
(c) If there is sufficient sea room, alteration of course alone may be the most effective action to avoid a close-quarters situation provided that it is made in good time, is substantial and does not result in another close-quarters situation.
(d) Action taken to avoid collision with another vessel shall be such as to result in passing at a safe distance. The effectiveness of the action shall be carefully checked until the other vessel is finally past and clear.
(e) If necessary to avoid collision or allow more time to assess the situation, a vessel may slacken her speed or take all way off by stopping or reversing her means of propulsion.
(f) (i) A vessel which, by any of these rules, is required not to impede the passage or safe passage of another vessel shall, when required by the circumstances of the case, take early action to allow sufficient sea room for the safe passage of the other vessel.
(ii) A vessel required not to impede the passage or safe passage of another vessel is not relieved of this obligation if approaching the other vessel so as to involve risk of collision and shall, when taking action, have full regard to the action which may be required by the rules of this part.(iii) A vessel, the passage of which is not to be impeded remains fully obliged to comply with the rules of this part when the two vessels are approaching one another so as to involve risk of collision.
Basically RULE 8 states that regardless if you are the stand on vessel or give way vessel you have a responsibility to avoid and take action using good seamanship and at a safe distance; and in doing so, these avoidance actions cannot create additional or additional or potential collision events...And, if there is a risk of additional or potential collisions, your should reduce speed to assess or your action to avoid should be take be very early on to avoid all potential collision events.
And then there is RULE 5
Rule 5 is the most violated rule in nearly every collision event. For more information about RULE 5, read my post OMG...Lookout!
RULE 5 LOOK OUT
Every vessel shall at all times maintain a proper look-out by sight and hearing as well as by all available means appropriate in the prevailing circumstances and conditions so as to make a full appraisal of the situation and of the risk of collision.
Without no other explanation, neither vessel was looking out! Clear, sunny, blue-ski day with excellent sea conditions; how in the world did these two vessels not see each other?
Yep, you guessed it... Both are in violation of RULE 5.
Who’s in violation?
After reviewing all the rules that would apply, the following determination based on my analysis:
Passenger Ship
RULE 5
RULE 7
RULE 8
RULE 16
RULE 18
Sailboat
RULE 5
RULE 7
RULE 8
RULE 17
Who’s at Fault?
So, who’s really at fault; meaning, who is financially liable?
Until 1975, American courts followed the "divided damages" rule in a mutual fault collision. Under that rule, the total damages suffered by the parties would be divided equally between them. The respective faults of the parties in causing the collision were not taken into consideration by the court. Rather, each party would be liable for one half of the damages suffered.
Since 1975, the American courts now follow what’s called the The Reliable Transfer rule of comparative fault. This rule is the modern day answer to the question, who pays what in a mutual fault vessel collision? Each party pays based on the percentage of fault allocated to it.
Therefore based on my crude analysis, the sailboat is responsible for 2/5’s of the overall damages and the passenger ship is responsible for 3/5’s of the overall damages to both vessels.
Something to think about for sure.
コメント